I'm sure this has been asked before, but I couldn't find any history. My question is, When bottling a whole batch of beer is it good to use priming sugar, Or should I force carbonate and use a beer gun. I know for shorter term bottling and comp. beers a beer gun is great. What about long term bottled beers or just the whole batch in general.

Logged

"The problem with the world is that everyone is a few drinks behind."-Humphrey Bogart

If I'm going to bottle a complete batch, I will usually prime with sugar and then bottle. I don't like doing it, but doing a whole batch with a counter-pressure filler like I have, does waste quite a bit of beer, which in turn I must drink immediately. For small numbers of bottles (a case or less), the bottle filler is the way to go. This is the way I do it, I'm sure others have their methods as well.

I have very good success bottling carbonated beer with a beer gun like device (picnic tap with short racking cane tube in the nozzle). The beer is at 30-32 F when I bottle this way and does not foam much. I catch excess foam in a large beer mug. Whith this method I generally bottle 12-24 bottles from each keg and in some cases, when I want to age the beer, I bottle the whole keg. It doesn't take me that much longer than bottling with a bottling bucket and the beer will be sediment free. The latter is a big plus if I take beer somewhere.

Good Q. There's really no wrong answer, just what works best for you. I prefer to force-carb & CP most smaller (<1.065) session-style beers that will be consumed within 6 months. Exception include sours & wheats, etc... I typically BC most of my big beers (>1.065) & Belgian-style ales, etc... that will continue to develop by cellaring. Again, there's really no "hard & fast" rules just what works for your homebrewery. Happy bottling!

There was a great brewer, brewhobby, that used to post a lot on the boards (but has disappeared for the most part) and his contention was that big, lay down type beers do better with bottle conditioning (i.e. priming) rather than CPF. IIRC, his reasoning was that the beer continued to develop in the presence of yeast, whereas when filling with a CPF it is as 'good as its gonna get' since most of the yeast was left behind after rackings and it would only degrade thereafter.

I used to argue with him about it since I'd gotten a beergun a couple of years ago and had begun bottling my bigs (RIS, Barleywine, etc.) this way.

This year, I figure I will bottle my bigger beers and test his theory out. I do still have some bottle conditioned barleywine from'06 that is still very good, and some beergun filled barleywine from early '08 - I'll have to do a test soon and see how they have aged!

I think I just further muddied the waters on this topic. Sorry.

Logged

The happiest people don’t necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.

Quote:There was a great brewer, brewhobby, that used to post a lot on the boards (but has disappeared for the most part)

Blatz, I'm going to hijack this thread for a second: I know brewhobby (same club, too) and he was a great brewer. Opinionated certainly but a really good brewer. Sadly, he's moved on to some other things and I don't think he's brewing much, if at all, anymore. I miss seeing him and sampling his beers.That said, I agree that big beers do seem to benefit from sitting on the yeast during bottle conditioning. Even during a judging session, often those bigger beers that have been counter-pressure (or similar) bottled for the comp don't have the same complexity--a generalization but an observation made.Gail

thanks for all the help. I think I will condition my baltic for next Christmas and carb. bottle a couple winter ales and save for next year. They're somewhat similar. I think my baltic will benefit from conditioning with yeast. Good info. thanks.

Logged

"The problem with the world is that everyone is a few drinks behind."-Humphrey Bogart

I was glad to see this thread, I've got a similar issue I'm dealing with.I brewed a Belgian strong dark ale in January 2007, racked to secondary and added Roselare blend when it got to about 75% of expected FG and let it sit in a carboy until June last year. Then I racked it back to the fermenter and added 8 pounds of fresh/frozen cherries. It's time to get off my lazy ass and bottle it but I don't know if I should use priming sugar and new yeast or force carb in a keg and beergun it. Anybody had a similar situation?

Wow, Brewhobby moved on. I certainly wish him all the best in his new endeavor. Escpecially, that he is happy with it. He contributed a lot to brewing.

About bottle conditioning and yeast. I’ll put this to the test as well, When I bottle this year’s Doppelbock with a “beer gun” I’ll add yeast to a few bottles to see if it makes a difference as the beer ages. There will be no priming sugar as the beer will be fully carbonated.

About bottle conditioning and yeast. I’ll put this to the test as well, When I bottle this year’s Doppelbock with a “beer gun” I’ll add yeast to a few bottles to see if it makes a difference as the beer ages. There will be no priming sugar as the beer will be fully carbonated.

Kai - I'm straight bottle conditioning my Barleywine and Old Ale that I brewed in Dec, but planned on kegging half and bottle conditioning the other on my Baltic Porter. Perhaps I will do the same (and bottle a couple Baltics off the keg) and hold them to do a comparison at a later date. I'll try to remember to post back.

Logged

The happiest people don’t necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.

Yes. Could they make a positive flavor contribution in these beers? Possible.Kai

right - it might contribute, which I think is what Brewhobby was getting at - I recently had a Fuller's Vintage 2005 that I'm sure is bottle conditioned - and all I could say was wow - certainly couldn't detect any yeast autolysis

Logged

The happiest people don’t necessarily have the best of everything; they just make the best of everything they have.

Yea that's too bad about Brewhobby. He made some really fine contributions on another board. He will be missed.

Most Belgian beers are bottle conditioned and it is believed that the conditioning is an essential part of the flavor that is achieved in the beer. The aging process in the bottle allows for the "Belgiany" flavor.

I believe the only way to find out the real truth is to do a blind tasting of the same beer, one bottle conditioned and another force carbed and bottled as Kai has suggested.